ArticleFamily practice2023
Prevalence of insomnia and hypnotic use in Norwegian patients visiting their general practitioner.
Article in Family practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prolonged Prescription Rates of Z-Hypnotics Among Individuals with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain and Insomnia: The HUNT Study.Nature and science of sleep · 2026Article
- The art of sleep: examining sleep strategies in the general population with a focus on the use of music for sleep.Journal of sleep research · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Correlates of Night Eating Syndrome, Insomnia, and Psychological Distress in Primary Care Patients with Obesity: A Cross-Sectional Study.Obesity facts · 2024Article
- The association between self-reported sleep problems, infection, and antibiotic use in patients in general practice.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the Global Psychotrauma Screen in the United States.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSleep problems are common in the general population, but there are few studies on the prevalence of sleep problems and hypnotic use among patients in general practice.
objectivesTo estimate the prevalence of insomnia (based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM], version 5), self-reported sleep problems and hypnotic use among patients in general practice, and explore whether the prevalence depended on patient characteristics.
methodsA cross-sectional study with questionnaire data collected by 114 final-year medical students while deployed in different general practices in Norway during 2020. A total of 1,848 consecutive and unselected patients (response rate 85.2%) visiting their general practitioners (GPs) completed a one-page questionnaire, that included the validated Bergen Insomnia Scale (BIS), questions on for how long they have had a sleep problem, hypnotic use, and background characteristics. Associations were estimated using a modified Poisson regression model.
resultsThe prevalence of chronic insomnia according to BIS was 48.3%, while 46.9% reported chronic sleep problems (sleep problems of ≥3 months) and 17.8% reported hypnotic use. Females, patients with low compared with higher education, and patients who slept shorter or longer than 7-8 h, had higher risk of chronic insomnia disorder (CID), chronic self-reported sleep problems (CSP), and hypnotic use. The oldest age group (≥65 years) had lower risk of chronic insomnia compared with the youngest (18-34) but twice the probability of hypnotic use.
conclusionsCID, CSP, and hypnotic use were prevalent among patients visiting their GP. Insomnia can be effectively treated and deserves more attention among GPs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.